A Matter
of Degrees
Promising
Practices for
Community
College Student
Success
A FIRST LOOK
Acknowledgments
Community colleges currently are experiencing perhaps the highest expectations and the greatest
challenges in their history. Facing fiscal constraint, enrollment pressures, and summons to support
economic recovery, these institutions also are rising to a new clarion call: the “community college
completion challenge.” Never has it been so clear that the futures of individuals, communities, and the
nation rest significantly on the ability of community and technical colleges to ensure that far greater
numbers of their students succeed in college, attain high-quality certificates and degrees, and transfer
to baccalaureate institutions.
As the student success and college completion agenda builds momentum across the land, there is
understandably a growing demand for useful information regarding effective educational practices.
Fortunately, there also is emerging evidence regarding a collection of promising practices — strategies
that appear to be associated with a variety of indicators of student progress and success. This report, the
first in a series, describes a new phase of work at the Center for Community College Student Engagement
that aims to contribute further to that growing body of knowledge about what works in promoting
student success.
The Center’s work builds on our own research but also on the work of others: the Community College
Research Center and Center for Postsecondary Research at Teachers College, Columbia University;
other university-based researchers, including colleagues at The University of Texas; and colleagues in the
national Achieving the Dream initiative, the new Completion by Design initiative, and numerous other
serious efforts aimed at improving community college education. Special thanks are due to the hundreds
of community colleges and hundreds of thousands of students and faculty who have participated in the
Center’s surveys, as well as those whose voices are lifted up through our focus group work. The findings
presented in this report are made possible through the generous support of the Bill & Melinda Gates
Foundation, Houston Endowment Inc., Lumina Foundation for Education, and MetLife Foundation.
Kay McClenney
Director
Center for Community College Student Engagement
Supported by grants from
Co-sponsored by
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
Houston Endowment Inc.
Lumina Foundation for Education
MetLife Foundation
The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement
of Teaching
Published by the Center for Community College Student Engagement.
© 2012 Permission granted for unlimited copying with appropriate citation.
Please cite this report as: Center for Community College Student Engagement. (2012). A Matter of Degrees:
Promising Practices for Community College Student Success (A First Look). Austin, TX: The University of
Texas at Austin, Community College Leadership Program.
Contents
PAGE
2 Helping Colleges Invest in Success
5 Design Principles for Effective Practices
6
Characteristics of Community College Students
8
Promising Practices for Community College Student Success
Planning for Success
■■
Assessment and Placement
■■
Orientation
■■
■■
Academic Goal Setting
and Planning
Registration before Classes
Begin
Initiating Success
■■
Sustaining Success
Accelerated or Fast-Track
Developmental Education
■■
First-Year Experience
■■
Student Success Course
■■
Learning Community
25
Designing Practices for Student Success
29 Next Steps for the Center and Colleges
30 Overview of the Respondents
■■
Class Attendance
■■
Alert and Intervention
■■
Experiential Learning
beyond the Classroom
■■
Tutoring
■■
Supplemental Instruction
32Center National Advisory Board
“Do not zero in on finding the silver bullet.
There aren’t any. The effects of college are cumulative
across a range of activities.”
— Patrick Terenzini
Distinguished Professor and Senior Scientist, Emeritus
Center for the Study of Higher Education
The Pennsylvania State University
Promising Practices for Community College Student Success 1
Helping Colleges Invest in Success
Community colleges across the country have created innovative, data-informed programs that are models
for educating underprepared students, engaging traditionally underserved students, and helping students
from all backgrounds succeed. However, because most of these programs have limited scope, the field now
has pockets of success rather than widespread improvement. Turning these many small accomplishments
into broad achievement — and improved completion rates — depends on bringing effective programs to
scale.
To meet this challenge while facing shrinking budgets and rising enrollment, colleges must be certain
that all of their resources — time and money — are being spent on educational practices that work
for all students. But what makes a practice effective? And how can colleges identify the mix of practices
they should use to close achievement gaps so all students succeed?
To help colleges answer these questions, the Center for Community College Student Engagement has
launched a special initiative, Identifying and Promoting High-Impact Educational Practices in Community
Colleges. This report presents the initiative’s preliminary findings.
Community colleges are increasingly aware of the need to substantially increase the completion of certificates and degrees. But there
now is unprecedented urgency for this work because having more
successful community college graduates is essential to sustaining
our local and national economies as well as maintaining strong
communities with engaged citizens.
This report describes 13 promising practices in community colleges.
Over the next three years, the Center will conduct additional data
analysis, hold focus groups with students and faculty members, and
continue the review of efforts under way in community colleges. This
work will contribute significant new knowledge about high-impact
educational practices and how they are associated with student
engagement, persistence, and completion in community colleges.
Colleges will be able to use these and future findings to make sound,
evidence-based decisions about how to focus institutional energy,
reallocate limited resources, design more effective programs, and
bring strong programs to more students.
“If we are going to make a
substantial dent in completion
rates, we must ask, ‘How can we
reshape students’ experience in
the one place where they will be
while they are on campus: in the
classroom?’”
— Vincent Tinto
Distinguished Professor
Syracuse University
2 A Matter of Degrees
FOR MORE INFORMATION, VISIT WWW.CCCSE.ORG.
Identifying and Promoting High-Impact
Educational Practices
The Center’s initiative on high-impact practices is a multiyear effort
that draws on data from students, faculty members, and colleges.
Findings from surveys and focus groups will be presented in a series
of reports.
This report provides a first look at the data on promising practices.
These are educational practices for which there is emerging evidence
of success: research from the field and from multiple colleges with
multiple semesters of data showing improvement on an array of
metrics, such as course completion, retention, and graduation.
This first look describes the promising practices from four
perspectives: entering students describing their earliest college
experiences, students addressing their overall college experiences,
faculty members providing their perceptions of student engagement,
and colleges focusing on their use of the practices.
Colleges can use these initial findings as they examine their use of
these promising practices. Moreover, while this first-look report
addresses practices individually, looking at data across the practices
highlights incongruities that colleges must address if they are to
The Center Opposes Ranking
The Center opposes using its data to rank colleges for a
number of reasons:
• There is no single number that can adequately — or
accurately — describe a college’s performance; most
colleges will perform relatively well on some benchmarks
and need improvement on others.
• Each community college’s performance should be
considered in terms of its mission, institutional focus, and
student characteristics.
• Because of differences in these areas — and variations
in college resources — comparing survey results among
individual institutions serves little constructive purpose
and likely will be misleading.
improve outcomes. For example, 79% of entering students report
that they plan to earn an associate degree, but just 45% of full-time
students meet that goal within six years. Colleges can use these
incongruities to focus discussions about what outcomes are most
important and what policies and practices are most likely to result
in those outcomes.
After additional data collection and analyses, the Center will report
on high-impact practices for success and completion at community
colleges. Subsequent reporting will aim to identify and define highimpact practices by examining the student, faculty, and institutional
data about promising practices in relationship to overall levels of
student engagement as well as student outcome data.
The Center’s examination of educational practices includes the
Center’s four quantitative surveys, qualitative data from focus groups
and interviews with students and faculty, and an extensive review
of existing research. As part of this work, the Center introduced
the Community College Institutional Survey (CCIS) as well as new
items on promising practices for its surveys of entering students, the
overall student population, and faculty. (See p. 4 for details about the
surveys used for the high-impact practices project.)
Data collection from CCIS and the additional promising practices
items from the other surveys will continue through 2012 and beyond,
and all community colleges are invited to participate.
“We have in our arsenal ways to engage students in
substantive ways. We know a lot more about what
works than we use.”
— George Kuh
Chancellor’s Professor Emeritus
Indiana University, Bloomington
• Participating colleges are a self-selected group. Their
choice to participate in the survey demonstrates their
interest in assessing and improving their educational
practices, and it distinguishes them. Ranking within this
group of colleges — those willing to step up to serious
self-assessment and public reporting — might discourage
participation and certainly would paint an incomplete
picture.
• Ranking does not serve a purpose related to improving
student outcomes. Improvement over time — where a
particular college is now compared with where it wants
to be — is likely the best gauge of a college’s efforts to
enhance student learning and persistence.
Promising Practices for Community College Student Success 3
Four Surveys, Four Perspectives
SENSE, CCSSE, CCFSSE, and CCIS
The Center administers four surveys that complement one another: Survey of Entering Student Engagement (SENSE), Community College Survey
of Student Engagement (CCSSE), Community College Faculty Survey of Student Engagement (CCFSSE), and Community College Institutional Survey
(CCIS). All are tools that assess student engagement — how connected students are to college faculty and staff, other students, and their studies
— and institutional practice.
Each of the four surveys collects data from a particular perspective, and together they provide a comprehensive understanding of educational
practices on community college campuses and how these practices influence students’ experiences.
SENSE
is administered during weeks four and five of the fall
academic term in classes most likely to enroll first-time students.
SENSE focuses on students’ experiences from the time of their
decision to attend their college through the end of the first three
weeks of the fall term. The survey collects data on practices that
are most likely to strengthen early student engagement. Entering
students are those who indicate that it is their first time at the
college where the survey is administered.
CCSSE, administered in the spring, surveys credit students
CCFSSE
CCIS, the Center’s newest instrument, was developed as part
is administered in conjunction with CCSSE to all
faculty teaching credit courses in the academic term during
which the college is participating in the student survey. The
faculty survey reports on instructors’ perceptions about student
experiences as well as data about their teaching practices and
use of professional time.
and gathers information about their overall college experience.
It focuses on educational practices and student behaviors
associated with higher levels of learning, persistence, and
completion.
of the Center’s initiative on identifying and promoting high-impact
educational practices in community colleges. CCIS collects
information about whether and how colleges implement a variety
of promising practices.
Note: CCIS results are preliminary and based on a sample of colleges. Due to the survey’s branching structure and the possibility of non-response
across various items, the number of respondents for each item ranges from 48 to 288 colleges; representativeness, therefore, varies from item to
item. For clarity, each data point presented is accompanied by the number of colleges that responded to the relevant survey item. The data set will
be expanded through future survey administrations.
Quantitative and Qualitative Data
The Power of Multiple Perspectives
The Center uses both quantitative and
qualitative data to paint a complete picture
of students’ college experiences. The
four surveys provide detailed quantitative
data, and the Center gathers qualitative
data through focus groups and interviews
with students, faculty, student services
professionals, and college presidents.
The Center encourages colleges to examine
data across surveys while cautioning that
the ability to make direct comparisons may
be limited. For example, with the CCSSE
instrument, students report their personal
experiences, while with CCFSSE, faculty
members indicate their perceptions of
student experiences in the college.
The Center’s survey data help colleges better
understand what is happening. Information
from focus groups and interviews can help
them begin to figure out why.
Nonetheless, when there is a gap between
the student experience and the faculty’s
perception of that experience, the data can
inspire powerful conversations about why an
apparent gap exists and what it may mean.
Many Center member colleges report that
looking at student and faculty data side-byside has been the impetus for significant
faculty-led change on their campuses.
4 A Matter of Degrees
Core Surveys and Special-Focus
Modules
SENSE and CCSSE each have a core set of
survey items, which is the same from year to
year, as well as a mechanism to add items
that can change from year to year. The core
surveys provide a large sample of data that
is stable over time while special-focus items
and modules examine areas of student
experience and institutional performance that
are of particular interest to the field. Specialfocus items for the 2011 and 2012 surveys
address promising practices for promoting
student success and completion.
FOR MORE INFORMATION, VISIT WWW.CCCSE.ORG.
Design Principles for Effective Practice
The Center’s multiyear project uses input from students, faculty,
and college leaders to explore the relative and combined value of 13
promising educational practices. The project builds on institutional
work and a body of research about current practices and their results.
However, the effectiveness of any educational practice depends on
its specific design and quality of implementation. At colleges across
the country, the practices described in this report are implemented
in a variety of ways and, as a result, their effectiveness can differ
dramatically.
There is emerging consensus that certain design principles are
critical for student success. No matter what program or practice a
college implements, it is likely to have a greater impact if its design
incorporates the following principles.
■■
■■
■■
■■
A strong start. Focusing attention on the front door of the college —
ensuring that students’ earliest contacts and first weeks incorporate
experiences that will foster personal connections and enhance their
chances of success — is a smart investment.
“What will it take to help teachers rethink the
precious minutes they have with students in the
classroom?”
Clear, coherent pathways. The many choices and options students
face as they endeavor to navigate through college systems can create
unnecessary confusion — and inhibit students’ success. Colleges can
improve student success (and minimize ill-used time) by creating
coherent pathways that help students move through an engaging
collegiate experience.
Integrated support. Time is a resource — one of the most important
resources a college has — and it is finite. A large part of improving
success involves effectively connecting with students where they are
most likely to be: in the classroom. This means building support,
such as skills development and supplemental instruction, into
coursework rather than referring students to services that are
separate from the learning experience.
High expectations and high support. Students do their best when
the bar is high but within reach. Setting a high standard and then
giving students the necessary support — academic planning,
academic support, financial aid, and so on — makes the standard
attainable.
— Emily Lardner
Co-director
Washington Center for Improving Undergraduate Education
Evergreen State College
■■
■■
■■
Intensive student engagement. Promoting student engagement is
the overarching feature of successful program design, and all other
features support it. In design and implementation of the collegiate
experience, colleges must make engagement inescapable for their
students.
Design for scale. Bringing practices to scale requires a long-term
commitment of time and money. Securing and maintaining this
commitment requires significant political, financial, and human
capital. In addition to allocating — and reallocating — available
funding, colleges must genuinely involve faculty, staff, and students.
Professional development. Improving student success rates and
meeting college completion goals require individuals not only to
re-conceptualize their roles but also to work differently. This means
that professional development is not just for instructors. It is for
everyone: staff, faculty, administrators, and governing boards.
The body of evidence about these design principles is growing. Even
as we continue to learn, colleges must act on it. Improving student
engagement and attainment cannot be the work of a select team or
an isolated department. To achieve the needed scale, faculty and staff
must collaborate across departments and throughout the college.
Then, more students will experience — and benefit from — all their
colleges have to offer.
Promising Practices for Community College Student Success 5
Characteristics of Community College Students
Students Balance Priorities
Most students attend classes and study while working; caring for dependents; and juggling personal, academic, and financial challenges. Colleges can help
students plan their coursework around their other commitments and help students develop skills to manage the demands on their time.
Working more than 30 hours per week
Attending college
Full-time
Part-time
41%
59%
Caring for dependents 11 or more hours per week
Full-time
students
(N=318,883)
Part-time
students
(N=116,221)
Full-time
students
(N=318,391)
Part-time
students
(N=116,067)
19%
42%
29%
37%
Source: 2011 CCSSE Cohort data.
Source: 2011 CCSSE Cohort data.
67% of full-time students and 78% of part-time students work at least one hour per week while taking classes.
53% of full-time students and 60% of part-time students care for dependents at least one hour per week.
Taking evening and weekend classes
Source: IPEDS, fall 2009.
Full-time
students
(N=314,783)
Part-time
students
(N=114,618)
13%
40%
Source: 2011 CCSSE Cohort data.
Entering Students’ Aspirations
Fewer than Half of Students Reach Their Goal
The data show a sizable gap between the percentage of students who aim
to complete a credential and the percentage of those who actually do.
Fewer than half of entering community college students with a goal of
earning a degree or certificate meet their goal within six years after
beginning college.
Please indicate whether your goal(s) for attending this college
include the following:
Met their goal within six years
Complete a certificate program (N=70,427)
45%
57%
Obtain an associate degree (N=71,138)
79%
Transfer to a four-year college or university (N=70,378)
73%
Source: U.S. Department of Education, NCES (2001). Beginning Postsecondary Students
Longitudinal Study 1996–2001 (BPS:96/01). Analysis by Community College Research Center.
Respondents may indicate more than one goal.
Source: 2010 SENSE Cohort data.
6 A Matter of Degrees
FOR MORE INFORMATION, VISIT WWW.CCCSE.ORG.
Percentage of Students Who Are Underprepared
SENSE respondents (entering students) who report their placement
tests indicated they needed developmental coursework in at least
one area (N=75,587)
Needed developmental
coursework in at least
one area
66%
CCSSE Promising Practices respondents who report that they took a
placement test and the test indicated that they needed developmental
education in at least one area (N=93,989)
72%
Took placement tests and
needed developmental
education in at least one
area
Source: 2010 SENSE Cohort data.
Source: 2011 CCSSE Promising Practices data.
Students’ Plans after the Current Semester
When do you plan to take classes at this college again? (N=433,639)
Asked about their plans after the current semester, 22% of CCSSE
respondents report that they have no plan to return to this college or are
uncertain about their future plans. These data suggest an opportunity for
colleges to help students establish academic plans and pathways that will
help them persist in college.
I have no current
plan to return
Uncertain
5%
17%
12%
66%
I will accomplish my goal(s)
during this term and will
not be returning
Within the next
12 months
Source: 2011 CCSSE Cohort data.
Student and Faculty Views: What Stands between Students and Their Aspirations
CCSSE and CCFSSE data indicate that many faculty are more likely than students to believe that various circumstances, including working full-time, caring
for dependents, or being academically underprepared, would be likely causes for students to withdraw from classes or college.
How likely is it that the following issues would cause you
to withdraw from class or this college?
How likely is it that the following issues would cause students
to withdraw from class or this college?
Students responding likely or very likely
Faculty responding likely or very likely
Working full-time (N=35,245)
Working full-time (N=434,142)
81%
38%
Caring for dependents (N=433,003)
Caring for dependents (N=35,163)
73%
28%
Being academically unprepared (N=431,316)
Being academically unprepared (N=35,217)
78%
19%
Lacking finances (N=35,145)
Lacking finances (N=432,734)
73%
49%
Source: 2011 CCSSE Cohort data.
Source: 2011 CCFSSE Cohort data.
Promising Practices for Community College Student Success 7
Promising Practices for Community College
Student Success
The promising practices described on the following pages are part of collegiate learning experiences that
attend to students’ needs from their first interactions with the college through the successful completion
of their first academic term and beyond. The practices are divided into three groups: planning for success,
initiating success, and sustaining success.
Planning for Success
Accelerated or Fast-Track Developmental
Education
Academic Goal Setting and Planning
■■
First-Year Experience
Registration before Classes Begin
■■
Student Success Course
■■
Learning Community
Assessment and Placement
■■
Orientation
■■
Sustaining Success
■■
■■
■■
Initiating Success
■■
Class Attendance
■■
Alert and Intervention
■■
Experiential Learning beyond the Classroom
■■
Tutoring
■■
Supplemental Instruction
Planning for Success
Assessment and Placement
“I’ve always been good in every subject I’ve taken, so it
was a shock to me that I was right on the borderline.”
— Student
Completing developmental education requirements early is related to
higher overall achievement, and students can’t complete if they don’t
enroll. Research suggests that students who need developmental
education and enroll in the proper courses during their first term
are more likely to complete their developmental sequence than are
students who need developmental education but do not attempt any
developmental courses during their first term.1
Making sure that students take the right classes is a multistep process.
Colleges should create opportunities for students to participate in
review or brush-up experiences before placement tests to minimize
the amount of remediation students need. Then, after students have
been assessed, those who still need remediation should be placed into
developmental pathways where they will have a stronger chance to
succeed rather than multiple opportunities to fail.
“My developmental class is ridiculously easy.”
— Student
Large numbers of students are being assessed and placed into
developmental education. Among SENSE respondents (N=73,299),
88% report that they were required to take a placement test. In
addition, 82% of SENSE Promising Practices respondents (N=23,470)
who reported their placement test results indicated they needed
developmental education also reported they were required to take
at least one developmental education course in their first semester.
CCSSE Promising Practices data show slightly lower figures: 74% of
respondents (N=128,924) report that they were required to take a
placement test. Of those students whose placement tests indicated
that they needed developmental education (N=71,167), 68% say they
were told that they were required to take a developmental course in
their first term.
These high responses for testing and moderate responses for
placement still leave 12% of SENSE respondents (N=73,299) and
26% of CCSSE Promising Practices respondents (N=128,924) who
indicate that they did not have to take a placement test.
8 A Matter of Degrees
FOR MORE INFORMATION, VISIT WWW.CCCSE.ORG.
Assessment and Proper Enrollment: Most Students Are Taking Placement Tests
and Properly Enrolling
Student Responses
Most Students Are Required to Take Placement Tests and Enroll in Needed Courses
Percentage of students who report that they are required to take
reading, writing, and/or math placement tests before registering for
their first semester
74%
Yes
(94,853 of 128,924)
Among students who report taking a placement test, the percentage
who report that the test indicated that they needed developmental
education in at least one area
72%
Yes
(68,125 of 93,989)
Source: 2011 CCSSE Promising Practices data.
Source: 2011 CCSSE Promising Practices data.
Among students who report taking a placement test and needing
developmental education, the percentage who say they were told they
were required to take at least one developmental education course in
their first term
Among students who say they were told they were required to
take at least one developmental education course in their first
term, the percentage who say they actually enrolled in at least one
developmental education class
68%
Yes
(48,648 of 71,167)
Source: 2011 CCSSE Promising Practices data.
83%
Yes
(56,900 of 68,624)
Source: 2011 CCSSE Promising Practices data.
“I have no idea why I got placed where I was.”
— Student
Among entering students who report taking a placement test and
needing developmental education, the percentage who say they were
told they were required to take at least one developmental education
course in their first term
82%
Source: 2011 SENSE Promising Practices data.
Yes
(19,327 of 23,470)
Among entering students who say they were told they were
required to take at least one developmental education course in
their first term, the percentage who actually enrolled in at least one
developmental education class
88%
Yes
(21,399 of 24,201)
Source: 2011 SENSE Promising Practices data.
Promising Practices for Community College Student Success 9
Assessment and Proper Enrollment: Testing Alone Isn’t Enough
Student Responses
Many Students Do Not Prepare for Placement Tests
Before enrolling at this college, I used online or printed materials provided by the college to help me prepare on my own for this college’s
placement test(s).
28%
Yes
(36,650 of 131,314)
Source: 2011 CCSSE Promising Practices data.
38%
Yes
(12,860 of 33,991)
Source: 2011 SENSE Promising Practices data (entering students).
Before enrolling at this college, I participated in a brief (8 hours or less), intensive brushup/refresher workshop designed to help me prepare for
this college’s placement test(s).
10%
17%
Yes
(13,498 of 131,353)
Source: 2011 CCSSE Promising Practices data.
Yes
(5,589 of 33,757)
Source: 2011 SENSE Promising Practices data (entering students).
Before enrolling at this college, I participated in a multiday or multiweek brushup/refresher program (often held during the summer before fall
enrollment) designed to help me prepare for this college’s placement test(s).
9%
14%
Yes
(12,239 of 131,232)
Source: 2011 CCSSE Promising Practices data.
Yes
(4,660 of 33,755)
Source: 2011 SENSE Promising Practices data (entering students).
College Responses
Many Colleges Offer Prep Experiences, but Few Require Them
Percentage of colleges that say they offer some form of placement
test-prep experience for reading, writing, or math
44%
Yes
(83 of 187)
Percentage of colleges offering a test-prep experience that report the
test prep is mandatory for all first-time students, including full-time
students and part-time students
13%
Yes
(11 of 83)
Source: 2011 CCIS data.
Source: 2011 CCIS data.
10 A Matter of Degrees
FOR MORE INFORMATION, VISIT WWW.CCCSE.ORG.
Orientation
“At orientation, they took us around the whole campus,
anywhere we wanted to go, and showed us everything,
so I was familiar with the school before I started.”
— Student
Colleges use a variety of approaches to student orientation. Orientation can be a single two-hour session that helps students find their
way around campus, explains registration, and mentions support
services. It also can be incorporated into a full-semester program,
such as a student success course. Or it can be anything in between.
Typically, however, an orientation is an experience that helps
students know what they most need to know before classes begin.
Research shows that orientation services lead to higher student
satisfaction, greater use of student support services, and improved
retention of at-risk students.2 Yet after three weeks of college, 19%
of entering students (14,416 of 74,261) are unaware of an orientation
program.
Among those colleges reporting on CCIS that they have an orientation program (276 of 288), just 38% report that they require it for
all first-time (full-time and part-time) students. The most frequently
cited components of orientation are information about and/or use
of the college’s personal/social support services; information about
and/or use of the college’s academic support network; and use of
information resources (e.g., library, finding and evaluating sources).
“[Online orientation was] a couple of people talking
about the campus, and then you took a test about what
they said. I would have preferred to come to school to
walk around.”
— Student
Academic Goal Setting and Planning
“I have my whole plan … all my credits to transfer,
exactly what classes and everything. It helps a lot
financially and keeps you on track. It just keeps you
motivated.”
— Student
Attaining a goal becomes dramatically easier when the goal is
specific and the path to reaching it is clear. Defining this path is the
work of academic goal setting and planning.
Ninety-one percent of CCSSE respondents (376,899 of 414,646) report
that academic advising/planning is a somewhat or very important
service. SENSE data, however, indicate that many entering students
are not getting the kind of advising that will help them most.
While 71% of SENSE respondents (52,112 of 73,502) agree or strongly
agree that an advisor helped them identify the courses they needed
to take during their first academic term, only 38% (27,936 of 73,406)
agree or strongly agree that an advisor helped them set academic goals
and create a plan for achieving them. An even smaller proportion,
26% (19,085 of 73,488) indicate that someone talked to them about
their outside commitments while helping them decide how many
courses to take during their first term.
While academic planning certainly includes course selection,
community college students need advising that helps them set and
maintain long-term goals. This type of advising and planning centers
on creating a clear path from where students are now to their ultimate
educational goals. Regular advising provides opportunities to update
the plan to respond to changing goals, interests, or circumstances.
The academic plan keeps students focused because it shows how each
course brings them closer to a key milestone and, ultimately, to the
certificate or degree they seek.
“I feel like I’m wasting time because counselors just
write down the classes you need and give you the
paper.”
— Student
Promising Practices for Community College Student Success 11
Academic Advising and Planning
Entering Student Responses
Faculty Responses
Nearly Half of Students Do Not Use Advising
and Planning Services
How often did you use academic advising/planning services
from the time of your decision to attend this college through
the end of the first three weeks of your first semester/quarter?
(N=70,179)
46%
Faculty Members’ Involvement in Advising
How often do you refer students to academic advising/planning
services?
Full-time faculty
85%
Sometimes or often
(15,317 of 18,055)
Never
Part-time faculty
71%
Source: 2010 SENSE Cohort data.
Sometimes or often
(12,295 of 17,298)
Entering Students’ Experience with Academic
Advising
Percentage of students responding agree or strongly agree
An advisor helped me to identify the courses I needed to take during
my first semester/quarter (52,112 of 73,502)
71%
An advisor helped me to select a course of study, program, or major
(44,340 of 73,513)
60%
Source: 2011 CCFSSE Cohort data.
During the current academic year, is academic advising
part of your teaching role at this college?
Full-time faculty
55%
Yes
(10,921 of 18,611)
An advisor helped me to set academic goals and to create a plan for
achieving them (27,936 of 73,406)
38%
A college staff member talked with me about my commitments outside
of school (work, children, dependents, etc.) to help me figure out how
many courses to take (19,085 of 73,488)
Part-time faculty
7%
26%
Yes
(1,347 of 18,219)
Source: 2010 SENSE Cohort data.
Source: 2011 CCFSSE Cohort data.
12 A Matter of Degrees
FOR MORE INFORMATION, VISIT WWW.CCCSE.ORG.
Registration: Students Register Late
Student Responses
More than one in 10 CCSSE respondents (11%) report they registered
late (after the first class meeting) for at least one class.
(26,828 of 238,504 respondents)
Registration before Classes Begin
Students who register after the first meeting of a class (late
registration) may be decreasing their chances for success before even
walking through the classroom door. Late registration correlates
with lower grades, lower completion rates, and lower re-enrollment
the following term.3 Many colleges, however, continue to permit late
registration. Moreover, even colleges with policies forbidding late
registration tend to be inconsistent in enforcing them.
Some colleges permit late registration because they do not want to
turn interested students away. But colleges do not have to shut the
door on late registrants. Instead, they can offer options such as latestart classes or intensive experiences for refreshing academic skills.
Fewer than 1 in 10 SENSE respondents (8%) say they registered late
(after the first class meeting) for at least one class. (2,629 of 34,266
respondents)
Eleven percent of CCSSE respondents (26,828 of 238,504) and 8% of
SENSE respondents (2,629 of 34,266) say they registered after the first
class session for at least one class.
Among CCIS colleges, 134 respondents report the incidence of late
registration. Of these colleges, only 10 (7%) say that no registration
occurred after the first class meeting. Among the colleges indicating
that they have a policy of prohibiting late registration, 63% (30 of 48)
report that they still have some incidence of late registration.
Source: 2011 CCSSE Promising Practices data and 2011 SENSE Promising Practices data.
Faculty Responses
Nearly two-thirds (62%) of CCFSSE respondents report that at least some
of their students registered after the first class meeting.
(12,570 of 20,458 respondents)
What percentage of the students in your selected course section
registered after the first class session? (N=20,458)
1–10%
registered late
56%
39%
0%
registered late
6%
11% or more
registered late
Percentages do not total 100% due to rounding.
Source: 2011 CCFSSE Promising Practices data.
Promising Practices for Community College Student Success 13
Initiating Success
Accelerated or Fast-Track Developmental
Education
“In remedial classes, they need to place you with
students who are going to learn at the same pace as
you.”
— Student
The longer it takes a student to move through developmental
education into a credit program, the more likely he or she is to drop
out.4 For example, students who place three or more levels below
college-level in math, reading, or English can take more than two
years to reach and pass their first college-level courses — if, in fact,
they ever complete the developmental sequence. Accelerated or
fast-track developmental programs can both enhance learning and
engagement and help students move into college-level work more
quickly.
A growing number of colleges are designing accelerated or fast-track
developmental education programs so students can focus on specific,
targeted issues for remediation; move through developmental
education at their own pace; and most important, move into collegelevel work more quickly. Research indicates that well-designed
accelerated programs are efficient — and that students in these
intensive courses perform equally as well, or better than, students in
traditional developmental education.5
Among the 120 CCIS respondents that have accelerated or fasttrack developmental education programs, 13% indicate that they
14 A Matter of Degrees
require these programs for all first-time (full-time and part-time)
developmental students. The most prominently cited components
of this practice are tutoring, information about and/or use of the
college’s academic support network, and basic technology skills (e.g.,
using the Internet, word processing).
First-Year Experience
“The first-year experience learning community is a big
help with the transfer from high school. When I got to
class, I [thought], ‘Is this it? It isn’t scary at all.’”
— Student
First-year experience programs create a small community within
the larger campus for first-year students, helping them build
relationships with other students as well as faculty and staff.
Students who participate in first-year experience programs
demonstrate more positive relationships with faculty, greater
knowledge and use of campus resources, more involvement in
campus activities, and better time-management skills than their
non-participating peers.6
Of the 166 CCIS respondents that report having first-year experience
programs, 27% indicate that they require these programs for all
first-time (full-time and part-time) students. The most prominently
cited components of this practice are time-management skills,
information about and/or use of the college’s academic support
network, and information about and/or use of the college’s personal/
social support services.
FOR MORE INFORMATION, VISIT WWW.CCCSE.ORG.
Student Success Course
Learning Community
Student success courses help students build knowledge and skills
essential for success in college, from study and time-management
skills to awareness of campus facilities and support services. Research
indicates that students who complete these courses are more likely
to complete other courses, earn better grades, have higher overall
GPAs, and obtain degrees.7
“Your papers are going to be on Mexican-American
history, but you’re still learning the essential skills you
need for English 101. It’s a good idea and fun.”
Of the 238 CCIS respondents that report having student success
courses, 15% indicate that they require these courses for all firsttime (full-time and part-time) students. The most prominently cited
components of this practice are study skills, time-management
skills, and note-taking skills.
“Since I’ve never been to college before, I took the class
with study skills, writing, and research. It’s everything
built into one class. It’s helpful. It is.”
— Student
— Student
Learning communities generally involve a group of students taking
two or more linked classes together as a cohort, ideally with the
instructors of those classes coordinating course outlines and
assignments as well as jointly reviewing student progress.
Learning communities build a sense of academic and social
community and increase engagement among students and faculty,
all of which lead to a variety of positive outcomes. These may include
improved academic achievement, as measured by GPA, credit
accumulation, and self-reported learning.8
The literature suggests that participating students also demonstrate
greater progress in academic subjects, indicate increased satisfaction
with the college, and report greater use of student support services.
Taken together, these characteristics may lead to improved retention
and learning outcomes.9
Of the 160 CCIS respondents that report having learning communities, only 1% indicate that they require these learning communities
for all first-time (full-time and part-time) students. The most prominently cited components of this practice are use of information resources
(e.g., library, finding and evaluating sources), study/assignments
focused on a common theme, and common readings.
Promising Practices for Community College Student Success 15
Structured Group Learning Experiences
The Center’s Promising Practices initiative describes five of the promising
practices — orientation, accelerated or fast-track developmental
education, first-year experience, student success course, and learning
community — as structured group learning experiences.
Typically, these practices reflect the goal of ensuring that students are
successful in the early weeks and then through the first year of college.
They can occur at different points in students’ entering experiences and
extend over differing time periods.
An important step for community colleges is to better understand and
describe these practices.
College Responses
CCIS participants (N=288) use a variety of approaches to reach their students, and most report using multiple structured group learning experiences:
30% report using three, 27% report using four, and 19% report using all five.
Which Structured Group Learning Experiences
Are Colleges Using?
Of the five structured group learning experiences, orientation is the most
commonly used among CCIS respondents; accelerated or fast-track
developmental education is used least.
Percentage of colleges that report they implement each practice
(N=288)
Do Colleges Make these Practices Mandatory?
Among responding colleges using each practice, the percentage
that require the experience for all first-time students (part-time and
full-time)
Accelerated or fast-track
Orientation
developmental education*
38%
13%
Yes
(105 of 276)
Yes
(15 of 120)
Orientation
96%
Accelerated or fast-track developmental education
*Required for first-time developmental
students only (part-time and full-time)
42%
First-year experience
First-year experience
58%
27%
Student success course
Student success course
Yes
(45 of 166)
15%
Yes
(35 of 238)
83%
Learning community
56%
Learning community
1%
Source: 2011 CCIS data.
How Do Colleges Evaluate the Success of
Structured Group Learning Experiences?
Yes
(2 of 160)
Source: 2011 CCIS data.
CCIS gave colleges a list of 11 types of data and asked the
colleges to indicate which types of data they use to evaluate
program effectiveness. The most common data types used across
all promising practices were overall course completion rates,
fall-to-spring retention, and fall-to-fall retention.
16 A Matter of Degrees
FOR MORE INFORMATION, VISIT WWW.CCCSE.ORG.
Student Responses
Faculty Responses
Students’ Participation in Structured Group
Learning Experiences
Percentage of CCSSE respondents who report engaging in each
experience
Participating in orientation
58%
Full-Time Faculty Members Are More Likely
than Part-Time Faculty to Be Involved with
Structured Group Learning Experiences
Full-time (N=10,972)
Part-time (N=11,645)
Percentage of faculty who say they teach or facilitate each practice
Yes
(N=237,325)
Orientation
13%
6%
Accelerated or fast-track developmental education
Participating in accelerated or fast-track
developmental education programs*
26%
Yes
(N=64,658)
14%
8%
First-year experience
17%
11%
Student success course
*Developmental education students only
Participating in a first-year experience program
26%
Yes
(N=230,996)
12%
11%
Learning community
16%
8%
Enrolling in a student success course
24%
Enrolling in an organized learning community
13%
Source: 2011 CCFSSE Promising Practices data.
Yes
(N=229,696)
Yes
(N=229,374)
“Without taking [developmental education], you
can’t even get to the college courses. I’ll probably be
in school here three or four years before I get to my
nursing program.”
— Student
“I like having classes that are linked. [Even if] you’re
moving across the campus for your next class, you
work with the same people.”
— Student
Source: 2011 CCSSE Promising Practices data.
Promising Practices for Community College Student Success 17
Components of Structured Group Learning Experiences
College Responses
CCIS asks colleges about the components they include in each structured group learning experience. The five most frequently reported components for
each structured group learning experience are displayed below.
Orientation Among 276 colleges reporting they have one or more programs
71%
68%
Information about and/or use of the college’s personal/social support services
Information about and/or use of the college’s academic support network
Use of information resources (e.g., library, finding and evaluating sources)
Time-management skills
Tutoring
50%
46%
38%
Accelerated or Fast-Track Developmental Education Among 120 colleges reporting they have one or more programs
54%
Tutoring
Information about and/or use of the college’s academic support network
Basic technology skills (e.g., using the Internet, word processing)
Study skills
Assigned group projects/assignments
43%
37%
33%
33%
First-Year Experience Among 166 colleges reporting they have one or more programs
72%
72%
70%
70%
67%
Time-management skills
Information about and/or use of the college’s academic support network
Information about and/or use of the college’s personal/social support services
Study skills
Use of information resources (e.g., library, finding and evaluating sources)
Student Success Course Among 238 colleges reporting they have one or more courses
90%
88%
88%
85%
81%
Study skills
Time-management skills
Note-taking skills
Test-taking skills
Use of information resources (e.g., library, finding and evaluating sources)
Learning Community Among 160 colleges reporting they have one or more programs
Use of information resources (e.g., library, finding and evaluating sources)
Study/assignments focused on a common theme
Common reading(s)
Information about and/or use of the college’s academic support network
Assigned group projects/assignments
59%
57%
56%
54%
53%
Source: 2011 CCIS data.
18 A Matter of Degrees
FOR MORE INFORMATION, VISIT WWW.CCCSE.ORG.
Sustaining Success
Class Attendance
“[When I miss class], my English teacher e-mails me and
says what we need to do for the next class.”
— Student
Attending class is a key element of succeeding in college, and
emerging evidence suggests that class attendance policies have value.
For example, researchers have found that students’ class attendance
is the best predictor of academic performance in college — it more
reliably predicts college grades than do high school GPA, SAT
scores and other standardized admissions tests, study habits, and
study skills.10
However, more research is needed to explore the effects of attendance
policies at community colleges. Seventy-seven percent of SENSE
Promising Practices respondents (26,401 of 34,072) report that all
of their instructors explained a class attendance policy, while only
3% (1,042 of 34,072) indicate that none of their instructors did so.
Moreover, about a quarter of SENSE respondents (19,033 of 73,649)
say they skipped class at least once in the first three weeks of their
first term.
“They don’t really care if you miss class because that’s
your fault.”
— Student
Class Attendance: Faculty Policies and Student Actions
Student Responses
Most Students Report that Instructors Have Attendance Policies
During the current semester/quarter at this college, my instructors clearly explained a class attendance policy that specified how many
classes I could miss without penalty.
All of my instructors
All of my instructors
explained a class
explained a class
77%
75%
attendance policy
attendance policy
25%
(N=132,279)
Not all of my instructors
explained a class
attendance policy
Source: 2011 CCSSE Promising Practices data.
23%
(N=34,072)
Not all of my instructors
explained a class
attendance policy
Source: 2011 SENSE Promising Practices data (entering students).
Students Skip Class
In your experiences at this college during the current school year,
about how often have you skipped class? (N=440,980)
During the first three weeks of your first semester/quarter at this
college, about how often did you skip class? (N=73,649)
Never
Never
74%
53%
Sometimes
Once
18%
42%
Often
4%
Very often
2%
Percentages do not total 100% due to rounding.
Two or three times
7%
Four or more times
1%
Source: 2010 SENSE Cohort data (entering students).
Source: 2011 CCSSE Cohort data.
Promising Practices for Community College Student Success 19
Class Attendance: Faculty Policies and Actions
Faculty Responses
Attendance Policies
How Class Attendance Policies Affect Grades
For your selected course section, do you have a course attendance
policy that specifies the adverse impact on students’ grades for
missing class? (N=20,478)
What is the nature of the adverse impact on students’ grades for
missing class (not assignment deadlines) in your selected course
section? (N=15,984)
78%
Percentage responding yes
Attendance is tied to a participation score or grade
Yes
63%
I deduct a given number of points from the final grade for each
missed class
13%
I deduct a given number of points after a preset number of classes
have been missed
Source: 2011 CCFSSE Promising Practices data.
18%
Respondents can choose more than one response.
Source: 2011 CCFSSE Promising Practices data.
Alert and Intervention
“She said, ‘I’m not going to be able to help you
individually because I’m so busy.’ I thought, ‘Okay, I’ll
just look at it until I understand what’s going on here.’”
— Student
Early academic warning processes typically are triggered when
faculty members identify students who are struggling and notify
others in the college who step in to support the students. Colleges
might follow up with students by e-mail, text, social media, or
telephone and encourage them to access services, such as tutoring,
peer mentoring, study groups, and student success skills workshops.
warning system. Faculty may also contact students directly: 67% of
faculty (15,113 of 22,617) say that when students are struggling in
their classes, they contact the students outside of class, while 63%
(14,269 of 22,617) say they communicate with students directly
during class.
“I just don’t want to tell him, ‘I don’t know how to do
this. I need help.’”
— Student
Some research suggests that when colleges make students aware of
their academic difficulties, students are more likely to successfully
complete the course in question and to persist over the long term.11
Only 14% of CCSSE Promising Practices respondents (17,654 of
127,770) say that they have experienced academic difficulties and
been contacted by someone at the college, while 27% of faculty (6,186
of 22,617) say that when students are struggling in their classes, they
notify someone else in the college who is part of a systematic early
20 A Matter of Degrees
FOR MORE INFORMATION, VISIT WWW.CCCSE.ORG.
Alert and Intervention: Reaching Out to Struggling Students
Student Responses
Most Students Have Not Been Contacted by Their Colleges
Someone at this college contacts me if I am struggling with my
studies to help me get the assistance I need (N=127,770)
Someone at this college contacts me if I am struggling with my
studies to help me get the assistance I need (N=32,750)
Yes
Yes
14%
14%
Not applicable; I
have not experienced
academic difficulties
34%
52%
No
Not applicable; I
have not experienced
academic difficulties
Source: 2011 CCSSE Promising Practices data.
35%
50%
No
Percentages do not total 100% due to rounding.
Source: 2011 SENSE Promising Practices data (entering students).
College Responses
Faculty Responses
Most Colleges Report Having Alert and
Intervention Processes
Most Faculty Report Contacting Students Directly
Has your institution implemented a systematic early academic
warning/early intervention process? (N=181)
77%
Which of the following statements describe actions you have taken in
regard to students who have been struggling academically during the
current semester/quarter in your selected course section?
(N=22,617)
Percentage replying yes
Yes
I’ve communicated with students directly during class
63%
I’ve contacted students directly outside of class
67%
I’ve notified someone else in the college who contacts students as part
of a systematic early warning system
Source: 2011 CCIS data.
27%
“I was having a difficult time completing an assignment,
so I just e-mailed her, and we ended up talking on the
phone, and she helped me through it.”
— Student
I’ve contacted someone else in the college who then contacts
students as part of an informal intervention process
11%
I have referred students to college tutoring services
52%
I have required that students participate in college tutoring services
5%
Other
8%
Respondents can choose more than one response.
Source: 2011 CCFSSE Promising Practices data.
Promising Practices for Community College Student Success 21
Experiential Learning beyond the
Classroom
Experiential (hands-on) learning, such as internships, co-op
experience, apprenticeships, field experience, clinical assignments,
and community-based projects, has multiple benefits. It steeps
students in content, and it encourages students to make connections
and forge relationships that can support them throughout college
and beyond.
More than three-quarters of CCSSE respondents (77%, 338,987 of
438,716) say they have not participated in a community-based project
as part of a course. Thirteen percent of faculty (2,653 of 20,301)
report requiring students to be involved in an internship or other
hands-on-learning experience. In turn, 15% of students (65,901 of
433,341) say they have had such experiences as part of coursework.
Forty-five percent of students (194,590 of 433,341) express interest in
having these experiences by noting that they plan to undertake them.
Realizing these plans, however, might not be possible given available
college resources and offerings.
“I’m in radiology, and now I’m at the hospital three
days a week, working like a regular employee. It’s
unbelievable that about a year ago, coming out of high
school, I didn’t know any of that.”
— Student
Experiential Learning
Student Responses
Few Students Participate in Experiential Learning
In your experiences at this college during the current school year,
about how often have you participated in a community-based project
as part of a regular course? (N=438,716)
Student responses regarding participating in an internship, field
experience, co-op experience, or clinical assignment (N=433,341)
I plan to
77%
45%
Never
I have
Source: 2011 CCSSE Cohort data.
15% 40%
I neither have nor plan to
Source: 2011 CCSSE Cohort data.
Faculty Responses
Most Faculty Don’t Require Hands-On Learning
How often do students in your selected course section participate in a
community-based project as part of a regular course? (N=36,793)
50%
Don’t know
28%
3%
Very often
Source: 2011 CCFSSE Cohort data.
22 A Matter of Degrees
Never
15%
In your selected course section, do you require students to be
involved in an internship, apprenticeship, clinical placement, or other
hands-on-learning experience beyond the classroom? (N=20,301)
13%
Yes
Sometimes
4%
Often
Source: 2011 CCFSSE Promising Practices data.
FOR MORE INFORMATION, VISIT WWW.CCCSE.ORG.
Tutoring
“Tutors walk you through your problem, and they
don’t make you feel stupid if you don’t understand
something.”
— Student
Studies suggest that participation in tutoring is associated with
higher GPAs and pass rates.12 For many colleges, the good news is
that tutoring can be offered in multiple ways and provide a range of
benefits in terms of student engagement. For example, group tutoring
can build relationships among students; one-on-one tutoring often
serves both tutor and tutee; and technology-enhanced tutoring can
maximize resources by focusing assistance where it’s needed while
helping to build students’ engagement with the subject matter itself.
Even though 73% of CCSSE respondents (N=403,333) indicate that
tutoring is somewhat or very important and 80% of CCFSSE respondents (N=35,299) report sometimes or often referring students to
tutoring, only about one-quarter of students (N=130,147) report ever
participating in tutoring.
“My grades are good because I go [to the tutoring
center] whenever I have free time.”
— Student
Tutoring Referral and Use
Student Responses
Faculty Responses
Few Students Participate in Tutoring
During the current academic year, I participated in tutoring provided
by this college (N=130,147)
76%
Never
Most Faculty Report Referring Students to
Tutoring
How often do you refer students to peer or other tutoring?
(N=35,299)
Don’t know/NA
Less than 1 time a week
12%
1% More than 4
9%
1 to 2 times a week
38%
3%
17%
times a week
Rarely or never
3%
42%
Often
Sometimes
3 to 4 times a week
Source: 2011 CCFSSE Cohort data.
Percentages do not total 100% due to rounding.
Source: 2011 CCSSE Promising Practices data.
Supplemental Instruction
“Anybody can come to [supplemental instruction]. You
go over material that’s been discussed in class. I got to
meet great people, and we formed our own study group
to help even more. It really saved me big time.”
Supplemental instruction, like tutoring, may increase the impact
of classroom instruction by providing extra time for skill practice.
Studies indicate that students participating in supplemental
instruction earn higher grades than their peers who did not
participate.13
While tutoring usually is conducted one-on-one, supplemental
instruction typically involves a regularly scheduled, supplemental
class for a portion of students enrolled in a larger course section. Supplemental instruction may be taught by the class instructor or a trained
assistant, often a former student who was successful in the class.
Students’ actions with regard to tutoring and supplemental
instruction tend to be responsive to requirements. Among faculty
who say supplemental instruction is available in their classes
(N=8,802), 19% require supplemental instruction for all or some students, while 81% make participation optional for all students. Student
responses (N=130,118) show that 18% of students participated in
some supplemental instruction, while 82% never did so.
— Student
Promising Practices for Community College Student Success 23
Supplemental Instruction
Student Responses
Few Students Participate in Supplemental Instruction
During the current academic year at this college, I participated in
supplemental instruction (N=130,118)
Never
82%
During the first three weeks of your first semester/quarter at
this college, about how often did you participate in supplemental
instruction? (N=73,728)
Never
69%
Less than 1 time a week
10%
Once
1 to 2 times a week
15%
5%
2 or 3 times
11%
3 to 4 times a week
2%
4 or more times
5%
More than 4 times a week
1%
Source: 2010 SENSE Cohort data (entering students).
Source: 2011 CCSSE Promising Practices data.
Faculty Responses
Few Faculty Require Supplemental Instruction
In your selected course section, is supplemental instruction available
to students? (N=20,302)
44%
Yes
56%
No
Among faculty who replied yes to the question at the left: In your
selected course section, do you require students to be involved in
supplemental instruction? (N=8,802)
81%
No, participation
is optional
9% 10%
Yes, for all students
Yes, for some students, depending
on academic performance
Source: 2011 CCFSSE Promising Practices data.
Source: 2011 CCFSSE Promising Practices data.
College Responses
Most Colleges Report Offering, but Not Requiring, Supplemental Instruction
Colleges that report offering supplemental
instruction in any classes
87%
Source: 2011 CCIS data.
24 A Matter of Degrees
Among colleges that offer supplemental instruction, the percentage that require it
Supplemental instruction is mandatory for all
first-time students (full-time and part-time)
Yes
(N=167)
1%
Yes
(N=145)
Supplemental instruction is mandatory for
all developmental education students
14%
Yes
(N=145)
Source: 2011 CCIS data.
FOR MORE INFORMATION, VISIT WWW.CCCSE.ORG.
Designing Practices for Student Success
Many colleges are implementing one or more promising practices —
and seeing dramatic gains in student retention and success.
Student Success Course
In fall 2007, Brazosport College (TX) began requiring all first-timein-college students to take Learning Frameworks, a student success
course that focuses on developing academic and personal skills,
enhancing study skills, and helping students set goals. Students in
the 2007–2009 cohorts who successfully completed the course had an
average fall-to-spring retention rate of 89%, compared to a baseline
of 66%; they successfully completed transitional reading at rates of
90% to 97%, compared to a baseline of 66%; and they successfully
completed transitional writing at rates of 77% to 95%, compared
to a baseline of 72%. In addition, 78% of Learning Frameworks
students in the 2009 cohort successfully completed pre-algebra,
compared to a baseline of 57%. Students who successfully completed
Learning Frameworks, moreover, were more likely to succeed in
developmental coursework, more likely to succeed in gatekeeper
courses, more likely to be retained, and less likely to withdraw.
first full year of GPS LifePlan implementation. New full-time cohorts
of students using GPS had fall-to-spring retention rates of 81%,
compared to overall fall-to-spring retention of 72%. The evaluation,
which also showed a high level of awareness and use among faculty
and students, included data analysis; focus groups with faculty,
students, and staff; and individual interviews with every member of
the campus leadership team.
Registration, Academic Planning, and Orientation
Analysis of CCSSE and SENSE results — and significant input from
faculty — led Chipola College (FL) to implement five policy changes:
(1) abolishing late registration so students are not programmed to
fail before they begin; (2) scheduling a mandatory 45–60 minutes
for entering students’ initial advising sessions; (3) allowing
students to register earlier to assist in planning for family and work
commitments; (4) offering orientation taught by faculty during the
summer before the fall semester starts; and (5) renaming Curriculum
Guides to Academic Plans so students will recognize them as clearly
laid out plans leading to graduation.
Also, over a five-year period, the college offered five one-day
mandatory faculty workshops and three optional paid summer
institutes for full-time and adjunct instructors. During these
workshops and institutes, faculty became increasingly focused on
promoting student persistence.
Academic Planning
The GPS LifePlan (Goals+Plans = Success) at Century College (MN)
helps students make intentional connections with the college and
gives them tools for success. The GPS website has links to resources
that help students develop goals and plans related to career,
education, finance, leadership, and personal development, and it
helps students maintain an eFolio (electronic portfolio) to track and
reflect on activities completed.
GPS is integrated into the college curriculum through the college’s
New Student Seminar as well as developmental reading courses,
learning communities, and other classes. More than 100 faculty
members have incorporated GPS in more than 40 courses throughout
the campus.
An independent evaluation of GPS found that first-time entering
students’ fall-to-fall persistence increased from 60% to 64% after the
Between 2005 and 2009, the time period when the college
implemented these measures, the college’s performance on two
CCSSE benchmarks, student-faculty interaction and support for
learners, increased sharply. Over the same time period, CCSSE data
on individual survey items also showed an increase in students’
perceptions that they received the support they needed to help
them succeed. Finally, three-year graduation rates of associate
degree-seeking students improved. For example, 24% of associate
degree-seeking students who started in fall 2002 graduated in three
years, compared to 31% of such students who entered in fall 2006.
First-Year Experience
The College of the Sequoias (CA) has a long history of serving
first-generation, low-income Hispanic students. The college’s FirstYear Experience (FYE) program is the umbrella of student support
that includes intrusive counseling, peer mentoring, learning
communities, and augmented instruction. Augmented instruction,
a mandatory component of the FYE math course, adds an additional
two hours of math with the instructor and tutor each week. All
instructors in the FYE math and English programs are full-time
faculty.
From fall 2009 to fall 2010, FYE developmental math students
who received augmented instruction had a 6% increase in success
compared to no improvement for FYE developmental math students
who did not receive augmented instruction. Success is defined as
passing with a C or higher.
Promising Practices for Community College Student Success 25
In the same time period, FYE students’ success rates in developmental
English (two levels below college-level) increased from 57% in fall
2009 to 63% in fall 2010, as compared with an increase from 49% in
fall 2009 to 59% in fall 2010 for all new students.
Retention rates for developmental English students participating in
the FYE rose from 90% in fall 2009 to 92% in fall 2010, as compared
with a steady 87% retention rate for non-FYE students.
In addition, pilot data on the college’s innovative augmented
instruction model indicate up to 20% improvement in course success
rates and 10% improvement in retention rates for FYE students
compared to the general new student population.
Required Orientation and College Success Course
In 2006, Durham Technical Community College (NC) took multiple
steps to improve its 69% first-to-second-semester retention rate. The
college began to require all first-time-in-college students — fulltime and part-time students with fewer than 12 successful college
credit hours — to attend a pre-enrollment orientation and to enroll
in a college success course. The two experiences help new students
understand enrollment and other college processes, manage the
college’s online systems, develop skills, explore career choices, draft
a specific degree-completion plan, connect with campus resources,
and build relationships.
The college now has data for four cohorts (2007–2010), and
persistence has improved each year. The 2007 cohort’s first-to-second
semester persistence rate was 73%. Nearly nine in 10 students in the
2010 cohort (89%) persisted into the second semester.
The college plans to continue these interventions and to add others,
such as required placement testing preparation and automated
registration to ensure correct course placement, to improve entering
students’ experiences.
Early Assessment
In fall 2008, Howard Community College (MD) launched a
partnership with the Howard County Public School System to assess
11th graders and better prepare them for college. The program
began with administering reading and writing placement tests for
all 11th grade students, except those enrolled in honors, Advanced
Placement, or gifted and talented courses. These students also met
with their high school guidance counselors and the college’s English
faculty to discuss college readiness in conjunction with grades and
overall high school performance.
After the testing, the county’s public school system used the college’s
developmental curriculum to infuse developmental objectives into
its classes. Thus, students who were not college ready (per their test
scores) were given the opportunity to become ready during their
senior year. High schools also added a senior-year writing project
and an oral presentation to their curriculum.
Two years after the program began, students who went from
the public school system to the college had an 80% fall-to-spring
retention rate, as compared with 56% for all first-time freshmen.
In addition, 40% placed into both college-level reading and
26 A Matter of Degrees
writing, as compared with 36% for all first-time freshmen, and 73%
improved their scores, compared to results from the test they took
in high school.
Developmental Education Completion
After reviewing CCSSE and SENSE data and conducting student focus
groups, Lee College (TX) determined that better student engagement
was critical to improve completion rates in developmental education.
The college adopted a three-pronged approach that centered on
redesigning courses, improving faculty development, and expanding
student support services.
The college’s specific strategies included (1) requiring a learning
strategies course for all new students whose placement scores indicate
a need for two or more areas or levels of remediation; (2) offering fasttrack remedial courses in reading, writing, and math; (3) eliminating
late registration so faculty can implement first-week engagement
activities in their courses; (4) requiring orientation for all students
new to the college; and (5) requiring financial aid orientation for all
students eligible to receive federal assistance.
In addition, faculty participated in professional development
including student success strategies workshops. Faculty, staff, and
administrators participated in the Center’s Entering Student Success
Institutes in 2008 and 2011.
To improve student support, a counselor is dedicated to developmental
education, and her office is located in the center of the building where
students take developmental education classes. She visits with each
developmental class, and students are required to make contact with
her each semester.
Between 2006 and 2011, developmental success rates in 16-week
courses increased from 44% to 59% in fundamentals of writing,
42% to 50% in intermediate algebra, and 67% to 70% in advanced
college reading skills. Fast-track developmental courses have shown
consistently higher success rates in math and reading, while results
were mixed in writing.
Moreover, from 2003 to 2007, the percentage of students completing
degrees and certificates within three years increased for all students
(from 11% to 19%) as well as among African Americans (10% to 13%),
men (13% to 17%), and 18- to 25-year-olds (11% to 16%).
Scaling Up a New Instructional Approach
When Montgomery County Community College (PA) wanted
to improve success rates for students placing into developmental
math, the college redesigned its instructional approach. The college
maintained two levels of developmental math (a basic arithmeticreview level and a college-preparatory-math level) but changed
the curriculum and teaching style for both. The newly designed
curriculum uses a conceptual approach and centers on creating
active learners. For example, rather than the traditional means of
teaching arithmetic — presenting definitions, providing examples,
and doing practice problems — instructors ask students to figure
out the process for solving problems. This approach makes students
active participants in their own education and better engages them.
FOR MORE INFORMATION, VISIT WWW.CCCSE.ORG.
In fall 2008, the college piloted the new approach in the basic
arithmetic course with 19 students, and 74% completed the course
with a C or better, compared with just 45% of similar students in
traditional developmental math. In spring and fall 2009, the college
continued with one pilot class each semester at the basic arithmetic
level, and students in these pilot classes had higher success rates
than their peers. In spring 2009, 63% of students in the pilot passed
with a C or higher compared with 34% of students in traditional
developmental math. In fall 2009, 68% of pilot students succeeded,
compared with 44% of their peers.
In spring and fall 2009, instead of placing all students with an
Accuplacer score of 20–74 in the basic arithmetic class, the college
decided to place students who had a score of 65–74 in the newly
designed college-preparatory developmental math course. The new
course combined basic arithmetic review with college-preparatory
developmental math. The college recorded higher success rates
for students in this class than for students in traditional collegepreparatory developmental math.
Based on these promising results, MCCC trained additional faculty
in the new approach and continued to make changes based on data.
In spring 2010, the college enrolled half of all students placing in the
basic arithmetic developmental math course in the redesigned classes.
In fall 2010, the college again expanded the scale of the developmental math program by further lowering the cut scores: All
students scoring 55–74 on their math placement tests were placed in
college-preparatory developmental math. Even with this lower cut
score, students in the redesigned college-preparatory class had a 58%
success rate (N=380), compared with a 40% success rate (N=284)
for students in traditional developmental math. With these results,
starting in fall 2011, all basic arithmetic classes began using the new
approach, and all students scoring 55–74 on their placement tests are
enrolled in the redesigned college-preparatory math course.
Professional Development for Adjunct Faculty
Faculty at Sinclair Community College (OH) created an Adjunct
Faculty Certification Course, which helps adjunct instructors learn
and practice effective teaching methods. Participants also can
accelerate their progress from Lecturer I to Lecturer II (and to higher
pay) if they demonstrate competency in five key areas.
The course gives adjunct faculty a toolbox of presentation techniques,
active learning strategies, knowledge of the campus and student
support systems, and knowledge of FERPA and other policies. It also
includes peer reviews of their classroom performance and mentoring
from other faculty members. The course is given in five sessions: The
First Day of Class, FERPA/Ethical and Legal Issues, Active Learning
and Critical Thinking, Presentation Techniques, and Student
Support Services.
The certification course has been positively received by department
chairs and adjunct faculty alike. Since the course teaches about
pedagogy, it offers crucial support to a majority of the college’s
instructors, and it frees up the department chairs for other duties.
Adjunct faculty are requesting additional sections of the course,
and the college is developing a new advanced track so professional
development can continue.
It is too early to evaluate results, but the college expects that having
better-prepared part-time faculty will improve student success.
Centralized Academic and Technical Support with
Faculty Engagement
The William J. Law Jr. Learning Commons at Tallahassee Community
College (FL) centralizes learning and technology support and
provides resources for all students across the curriculum. Students
taking classes from developmental studies through sophomore
courses receive individual and small-group tutoring in a broad range
of subject areas, technology instruction, assistance with research and
information literacy, and counseling. They have access to technology,
group study spaces, and a wide range of print and online resources.
Faculty engagement is key to the program’s success. Many faculty
members have scheduled office hours in the Learning Commons and
provide professional support for students and learning specialists.
Faculty and staff collaborate to help students master content, develop
effective learning strategies, strengthen their technology skills, and
use resources. In addition, counseling staff, learning specialists, and
faculty collaborate to develop Academic Success Plans for students
with academic challenges.
The Learning Commons provided a dramatic change in student
support at Tallahassee. Before it opened, learning support was
fragmented and accessed by a small percentage of students. In its
first three years, the number of individual students served grew from
7,200 students in fall 2008 to 11,300 students in fall 2010. During that
same period, the number of unique courses served increased, as did
the number of logged individual visits. As important, the percentage
of full-time faculty with scheduled time in the Learning Commons
increased from 15% in 2008 to nearly 40% in 2010.
Students who use the Learning Commons are more successful in
their courses and persist at higher rates than students who don’t use
it. Among students taking the college’s 20 classes with the highest
enrollment, students who used the resources four or more times had
a 9% higher success rate in fall 2010 and a 17% higher success rate in
spring 2011. Differences for developmental students were even more
dramatic. The number of students successfully completing classes
increased 25% in fall 2010 and 35% in spring 2011. Success is defined
as passing with a C or higher.
Promising Practices for Community College Student Success 27
Retention rates also are higher among students who regularly use the
Learning Commons. In the fall 2008 cohort, fall-to-spring retention
was 9% higher among students who visited the Learning Commons
four or more times and 8% higher among students who had one
to three visits than among students who never visited. Fall-to-fall
retention for fall 2009 was 29% higher for students who used the
resources four or more times, and 27% higher for those using the
resources one or more times.
Graduation rates for the first-time-in-college fall 2008 cohort
(N=2,415) also show a positive effect related to participating in the
Learning Commons. The three-year graduation rate for students
using the resources of the Learning Commons was 41%, compared
to 7% for students who never used the resources.
Centralized Academic Support
West Kentucky Community and Technical College (KY) replaced
its tutoring center with an Academic Support Center to better meet the
needs of the college’s growing number of underprepared and at-risk
students. The new center provides supplemental instruction and
trains its tutors with consistent guidelines. Students are encouraged
to study at the center, schedule appointments for tutoring, and attend
sessions that address test anxiety, organizational skills, note taking,
and other issues.
Since the opening of the Academic Support Center, the college has
had a 10% increase in retention during a period of steady growth
in its student population. The Academic Support Center is working
with 1,000 of the college’s nearly 4,000 credential-seeking students.
In fall 2010, the college evaluated its tutoring services by comparing
the performance of students tutored in the Academic Support
Center with that of students in the same course sections (students
who received the same classroom instruction but did not receive
tutoring). The results: 60% of the students who received tutoring
successfully completed their courses, compared with 54% of their
peers who did not receive tutoring.
Registration and Orientation
In fall 2009, York Technical College (SC) ended its practice of
late registration and began requiring students to register for credit
courses prior to the first class meeting. Before this change, students
could register for credit courses until the last day of the first week of
classes. To accommodate students who do not register on time, the
college now offers some of its more popular courses in eight- and
12-week mini-courses that begin later in the semester. The college
credits the new registration policy — and its fall 2010 mandate for
all credit-seeking students to attend orientation — with its increased
scores on all SENSE benchmarks.
With these strategies in place, the college scored 63 (relative to a
standardized national average of 50) on the early connections SENSE
benchmark. Students’ responses to individual SENSE survey items
support the conclusion that these practices have a positive effect on
early student engagement. For example, the percentage of students
who agree or strongly agree that they were assigned a specific person
to see for information increased from 41% to 55%. In addition, the
percentage of students who report that they never worked with other
students on a project during class decreased from 27% to 17%.
Intrusive Advising for At-Risk Students
Zane State College (OH) introduced intrusive advising to boost
fall-to-fall retention among at-risk and underprepared students. The
college chose to focus on these students because of data indicating
that students who successfully complete their first year, even
developmental education students, have a nearly 90% likelihood of
graduating on time (within three years).
The college’s intensive advising efforts, all designed to foster
personal connections with students, included personal phone calls,
mandatory meetings, e-mails, and Facebook postings. The ongoing
interaction allowed advisors to redirect course registrations when
needed and remind students of peer and professional tutoring,
writing workshops, and other services. At the same time, the college
introduced mandatory assessment and placement, mandatory
orientation, and a mandatory first-year experience course.
These efforts have resulted in increased retention of at-risk students as
well as higher completion rates for developmental education courses.
For example, in 2006, first-to-second-term retention among at-risk
students was 77%. In 2009, that figure rose to 82%. In addition, fallto-fall retention of those students deemed most at risk has increased
by 10%–16% over the 2006 baseline, with the 2008 and 2009 cohorts
persisting at rates equal to or better than their less at-risk peers.
Overall, Zane State’s year-to-year retention has improved by 6%.
Developmental education students showed pronounced improvements in all subject areas. In 2004, 44% of students completed their
developmental English sequences in their first year, compared with
67% who did so in 2009. In the same time period, developmental
math completion rates rose from 14% to 35%, and developmental
reading completion rates rose from 46% to 59%.
In addition, in fall 2011, the college required all entering credit
students to attend an orientation session. Then, after meeting with
a college admissions counselor, students were invited to attend an
orientation session specific to the department of their program
of study. These sessions helped entering students understand the
requirements of their programs and gave them opportunities to
interact with their advisors, faculty, and fellow students.
28 A Matter of Degrees
FOR MORE INFORMATION, VISIT WWW.CCCSE.ORG.
Next Steps for the Center and Colleges
Next Steps for the Center
The initiative — Identifying and Promoting High-Impact
Educational Practices in Community Colleges — is ongoing. CCIS
will be administered again in 2012, and all community colleges are
invited to participate. In addition, the special-focus items about
promising practices will again be included in CCSSE, CCFSSE, and
SENSE administrations. The next phase of Promising Practices data
analysis will explore the relationship between student participation
in the practices and (1) the CCSSE and SENSE benchmarks; (2)
individual CCSSE and SENSE student engagement items; (3) selfreported student outcome measures from CCSSE and SENSE; and
(4) matched student-record outcome data, such as grades, retention,
course completion, and graduation. This research will be presented
in a subsequent report to be published in 2013.
“All these experiences require resources that most of our
institutions don’t have. We need to re-channel, stop
doing some of the things we are doing now that aren’t
working well. It is easy to say, but hard to do.”
— George Kuh
Chancellor’s Professor Emeritus
Indiana University, Bloomington
developmental education, but 82% of students say they never
participated in supplemental instruction and 76% say they never
participated in tutoring. At the same time, 87% of colleges report
that they offer supplemental instruction, but only 14% make it
mandatory for developmental education students.
■■
Evaluate Current and New Programs
■■
Inventory current practices. What practices does the college use?
What do data reveal about their effectiveness? At what level of scale
are they implemented? For what target student populations?
■■
Disaggregate the data and determine how effectively college
programs are serving different student groups, paying close attention
to underprepared students and students who are traditionally
underserved.
■■
Choose what to care about and then how to leverage resources.
If everything is a priority, then nothing of significance gets done.
Given limited resources, colleges must identify the intentionally
designed experiences that will have the largest possible positive
impact on the largest possible number of students.
■■
Using evidence, identify programs that should be scaled up and
programs that should be modified or discontinued. How can
resources be reallocated to strategies that hold greater promise?
■■
Think about how multiple practices can reinforce one another. In
most cases, multiple practices must work in concert to generate
significant change.
■■
Make the most of finite opportunities to engage students. For each
course, colleges and faculty typically have about three hours per week
with their students. What is the best way to capitalize on that time?
Next Steps for Colleges
Colleges have a growing body of evidence about what works, and
they may have to look at things in new ways to make changes that are
critical for success. There are no easy answers and no silver bullets.
Real solutions only come with honest, unflinching evaluation of
programs and practices — and a commitment to focus resources on
efforts that are part of coherent educational pathways for students.
Using this report as a guide, colleges can evaluate their own use
of promising practices. The recommendations below can guide
discussions among administrators, faculty, staff, and students.
Look for Incongruities
Look for incongruities in the data presented in this report and
determine if these (or others) apply to your college. Use that
information to prompt courageous conversations about what
outcomes are most important to your college — and what changes
will result in them. For example:
■■
■■
Can more students test out of developmental education? 74% of
students report that they were required to take a placement test,
but only 28% say they used materials provided by the college to
prepare for those tests. Smaller percentages report participating in
an intensive skills brush-up experience. At the same time, 44% of
colleges report offering some sort of test preparation, but only 13%
make test preparation mandatory.
Are students getting the academic support they need?
72% of students who took a placement test report that they needed
Does academic planning set students up for success? 42% of parttime students and 19% of full-time students work more than 30
hours per week. More than half care for dependents. But only 26%
of entering students say a staff member talked with them about their
commitments outside of class to help them figure out how many
courses to take.
Resources for Colleges
A growing collection of resources created by the Center can
help colleges in their work to continuously strengthen student
engagement.
The Center works in partnership with member colleges through
a combination of local, state, and national institutes; conference
presentations; publications; webinars; and other online tools. Always,
the goal is to help practitioners understand their data and use those
data to make informed decisions about how best to redesign and
improve students’ educational experiences.
The Center provides a variety of resources through its website,
including communication tools, accreditation tools that map Center
survey items to regional accreditation standards, and focus group tools.
Promising Practices for Community College Student Success 29
Overview of the Respondents
The 2011 CCSSE and CCFSSE Cohorts
Each year, CCSSE is administered in the spring during class sessions
at CCSSE member colleges. All institutions that participated in the
CCSSE administration are invited to participate in CCFSSE, which
is administered online. At colleges that choose to participate in
CCFSSE, every faculty member teaching credit classes in the spring
term is eligible to respond to the survey.
CCSSE and CCFSSE data analyses from the main survey use a threeyear cohort of participating colleges. Using a three-year cohort
increases the number of institutions, students, and faculty in the
national data set; optimizes representation of institutions by size and
location; and therefore, increases the stability of the overall results.
The 2011 CCSSE Cohort and the 2011 CCFSSE Cohort include all
colleges that participated in CCSSE and CCFSSE from 2009 through
2011.
■■
■■
■■
■■
■■
■■
Nearly 444,000 students from 699 institutions in 48 states and the
District of Columbia, five Canadian provinces (Alberta, British
Columbia, Nova Scotia, Ontario, and Quebec), Bermuda, and the
Northern Marianas are included in the 2011 CCSSE Cohort.
■■
2011 CCSSE Cohort respondents range in age from 18 to 65 and
older.
■■
CCFSSE respondents generally mirror the national two-year college
faculty population. The notable exception is employment status:
Nationally, 33% of two-year college faculty members are employed
full-time, and 51% of 2011 CCFSSE Cohort respondents indicated
they are employed full-time.15
■■
The special-focus items on promising practices were administered
in 2011 only. Data on those items come from 2011 CCSSE or 2011
CCFSSE respondents.
The 2010 SENSE Cohort
In this report, SENSE data include only entering students — students
who indicate that it is their first time at their college. The 2010 SENSE
Cohort includes all colleges that particpated in SENSE in 2009 and
2010.
■■
2011 CCSSE Cohort member colleges in the United States enroll a
total of 5,109,690 credit students — approximately 67% of the total
credit-student population in the nation’s community colleges.
The 2010 SENSE Cohort includes approximately 75,000 entering
students from 172 institutions in 35 states plus the District of
Columbia and the Northern Marianas. SENSE colleges in the United
States represent a total enrollment of 1,357,713 students.
■■
Of the 699 participating colleges, 313 (45%) are classified as small (up
to 4,499 students), 185 (26%) as medium (4,500–7,999 students), 125
(18%) as large (8,000–14,999 students), and 76 (11%) as extra large
(15,000 or more students). Nationally, 48% of community colleges
are small, 23% are medium, 18% are large, and 12% are extra large.
The survey was administered in classes randomly selected from the
population of all first college-level English, first college-level math,
and developmental education courses (excluding ESL courses).
These are the courses most likely to enroll entering students.
■■
According to the Carnegie Classifications,14 the 2011 CCSSE Cohort
includes 149 (21%) urban-serving colleges, 149 (21%) suburbanserving colleges, and 401 (57%) rural-serving colleges. Fall 2009 data
indicate that among all U.S. community colleges, 18% are urban,
20% are suburban, and 62% are rural.
In SENSE sampling procedures, students are sampled at the
classroom level. As a result, full-time students, who by definition
are enrolled in more classes than part-time students, are more likely
to be sampled. To adjust for this sampling bias, SENSE results are
weighted based on the most recent publicly available IPEDS data.
■■
The special-focus module on promising practices was administered
in 2011 only. Data on those items come from 2011 SENSE
respondents.
2011 CCSSE Cohort respondents generally reflect the underlying
student population of the participating colleges in terms of
gender and race/ethnicity. Part-time students, however, were
underrepresented in the CCSSE sample because classes are sampled
rather than individual students. (About 27% of CCSSE respondents
are enrolled part-time, and 73% are enrolled full-time. IPEDS
reports the national figures as 59% part-time and 41% full-time.) To
address this sampling bias, CCSSE results are weighted by part-time
and full-time status to reflect the institutions’ actual proportions of
part-time and full-time students.
2011 CCSSE Cohort respondents are 57% female and 43% male.
These figures mirror the full population of CCSSE Cohort
community college students.
With respect to race/ethnicity, 2011 CCSSE Cohort respondents,
2010 SENSE Cohort respondents, and the national community
college population may be compared as follows:
CCSSE
respondents
SENSE
respondents
National
percentages
White
62%
54%
54%
Latino/Hispanic
12%
18%
16%
Black
11%
15%
14%
Asian or Pacific Islander
4%
3%
6%
Native American
2%
2%
1%
Other
4%
4%
10%
Race/ethnicity
Sources: 2011 CCSSE Cohort data; 2010 SENSE Cohort data; IPEDS, fall 2009.
Percentages may not total 100% due to rounding.
30 A Matter of Degrees
FOR MORE INFORMATION, VISIT WWW.CCCSE.ORG.
2011 CCIS Respondents
There were, in total, 336 colleges that responded to the CCIS in its
first administration. These colleges are located in 45 states, plus the
District of Columbia, three Canadian provinces, and the Bahamas.
The U.S. colleges come from all six accreditation regions, with a slight
overrepresentation of colleges accredited by the Southern Association
of Colleges and Schools and the New England Association of Schools
and Colleges.
The CCIS colleges serve urban, suburban, and rural settings in the
same proportions as all other community colleges nationally, though
the colleges that responded tended to be large in their enrollment
sizes. CCIS respondents are similar to other community colleges in
terms of the proportion of colleges participating in Achieving the
Dream and Completion by Design initiatives.
When looking at the enrollments in CCIS colleges by demographic
characteristics (full-time versus part-time, gender, race, and age
groups), the proportions of these groups in the student body were
not statistically different from other colleges nationwide. There
was a lower proportion of some race/ethnicity groups, and student
populations at CCIS-responding colleges tended to be slightly
younger than students among the remaining community colleges in
the United States.
In short, this means that CCIS colleges are on average larger, slightly
less diverse in limited aspects, and have a slightly younger student
body than their peers nationally. These 336 colleges collectively
enroll roughly 2.5 million students.
Endnotes
1 Weissman, J., Bulakowski, C., & Jumisko, M.K. (1997). Using research to evaluate developmental
education programs and policies. In J. M. Ignash (ed.), Implementing effective policies for
remedial and developmental education: New directions for community colleges, 100, 73–80. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
2 Boylan, H., & Saxon, D. (2002). What works in remediation: Lessons from 30 years of research.
Prepared for the League for Innovation in the Community College. Retrieved from http://
inpathways.net/Boylan--What%20Works.pdf
3 Ford, G.G., Stahl, K.J., Walker, M.E., & Ford, A.M. (June 2008). Better late than never? The
relation of registration data to class performance. College Student Journal, 42(2), 402–407.
Freer-Weiss, D. (2004). Community college freshmen: Last in, first out? Journal of College
Student Retention Research Theory and Practice, 6(2), 137–154.
4 Bettinger, E.P., & Long, B.T. (2008). Addressing the needs of under-prepared students in
higher education: Does college remediation work? Retrieved from http://gseacademic.harvard.
edu/~longbr/Bettinger_Long_-_Addressing_needs_of_under-prepared_students_(4-08).pdf
5 Scott, P.A., & Conrad, C.F. (1991). A critique of intensive courses and an agenda for research.
Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research, 8, 411–159. ERIC Digest 337087
& Wlodkowski, R.J. (2003, Spring). Accelerated learning in colleges and universities. New
Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 97, 5–15.
6 Brownell, J.E., & Swaner, L.E. (2010). Five high-impact practices: Research on learning
outcomes, completion, and quality. Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges and
Universities.
8 Moore, C., & Shulock, N. (2009). Student progress toward degree completion: Lessons from
the research literature. Retrieved from http://www.csus.edu/ihelp/PDFs/R_Student_Progress_
Toward_Degree_Completion.pdf
9 Bourdon, C., & Carducci, R. (2002). What works in the community colleges: A synthesis of
literature on best practices. Los Angeles, CA: UCLA Graduate School of Education. (ERIC
Document Reproduction Service No. ED471397).
10Crede, M., Roch, S.G., & Kieszczynka, U.M. (2010, June). Class attendance in college: A metaanalytic review of the relationship of class attendance with grades and student characteristics.
Review of Educational Research, 80(2), 272–295.
11Bourdon, C., & Carducci, R. (2002). What works in the community colleges: A synthesis of
literature on best practices. Los Angeles, CA: UCLA Graduate School of Education. (ERIC
Document Reproduction Service No. ED471397).
12Boylan, H., Bliss, L., & Bonham, B. (1997). Program components and their relationship to student
success. Journal of Developmental Education, 20(3), 2–4, 6, 8.
13Pascarella, E.T., & Terenzini, P.T. (2005). How college affects students: A third decade of research
(Vol.2). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
14CCSSE uses the Carnegie Classifications (from the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of
Teaching) to identify colleges as urban serving, suburban serving, and rural serving.
152004 National Study of Postsecondary Faculty.
7 Moore, C., & Shulock, N. (2009). Student progress toward degree completion: Lessons from
the research literature. Retrieved from http://www.csus.edu/ihelp/PDFs/R_Student_Progress_
Toward_Degree_Completion.pdf
Promising Practices for Community College Student Success 31
Center National Advisory Board
Peter Ewell, Chair
Vice President
National Center for Higher Education Management Systems
(NCHEMS)
Walter Bumphus
President and CEO
American Association of Community Colleges (AACC)
Byron N. McClenney
Program Director, Achieving the Dream
The University of Texas at Austin
Alexander McCormick
Director, National Survey of Student Engagement
Indiana University
Bernadine Chuck Fong
Senior Partner
The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching
John Nixon
Associate Vice President
Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges
of the Western Association of Schools and Colleges
Rosemary Gillett-Karam
Director and Associate Professor
Morgan State University
Daniel Phelan
President
Jackson Community College (MI)
Alex Johnson
President
Community College of Allegheny County (PA)
Cam Preus
Commissioner
Department of Community Colleges and Workforce
Development (OR)
Christine Johnson
Chancellor/CEO
Community Colleges of Spokane (WA)
William Law
President
St. Petersburg College (FL)
Larry Litecky
Interim Vice Chancellor for Academic and Student Affairs
Minnesota State Colleges and Universities
John E. Roueche
Director, Community College Leadership Program
The University of Texas at Austin
Mary Spangler
Chancellor
Houston Community College System (TX)
Gerardo de los Santos
President and CEO
League for Innovation in the Community College
Vincent Tinto
Distinguished Professor
Syracuse University
32 A Matter of Degrees
FOR MORE INFORMATION, VISIT WWW.CCCSE.ORG.
Center Staff
Kay McClenney
Director
Adrienne Dellinger
College Liaison
Shanna Pharis
Webmaster
Jeff Crumpley
Associate Director, Operations
Zach Garcia
Administrative Associate
Marlana Rodgers
Administrative Associate
Angela Oriano-Darnall
Associate Director, College Relations
Janelle Guillory
Research Associate
Judy Row
Administrative Manager
Courtney Adkins
Survey Operations Coordinator
Deryl Hatch
Research Assistant
Arleen Arnsparger
Project Manager, Initiative on Student
Success
Carlos Hernandez
Software Developer
Brandy Shaw
Administrative Associate, Student Success
BY THE NUMBERS
Amina Benchouia
College Relations Specialist
Cat Jones
Research Assistant
Evelyn Waiwaiole
Project Manager, High-Impact Practices
Initiative
John Weafer
Business Manager
E. Michael Bohlig
Senior Research Associate
April Juarez
Program Coordinator, Student Success
BY THE NUMBERS
Colleen Bullock
Research Associate
JiYoon Kim
Research Assistant
Karla Cantu
Research Assistant
Christine McLean
Senior Associate CCSSE and SENSE
Member Colleges
Chris Cosart
Web Database Administrator
Norvell Northcutt
Research Associate
For lists of CCSSE and SENSE member
colleges, visit www.cccse.org.
Meagan Cusack
College Liaison
Chris Orozco
Administrative Assistant
Editorial support and design by KSA-Plus Communications, Inc.
Center for Community College
Student Engagement
Community College Leadership
Program
College of Education
The University of Texas at Austin
3316 Grandview Street
Austin, TX 78705
T: 512.471.6807 F: 512.471.4209
info@cccse.org
www.cccse.org